Quality Management in the Communications Industry: A Literature Review

Abstract

The aim is to develop and verify a comprehensive model for quality management in the communications industry. Drawing on established general concepts of quality assessment and management (DIN ISO 8402, DIN 9000ff) the paper derives a concept reconnecting enabling factors of QM in the communication industry to their satisfaction and performance outcomes. A metaanalysis of previous empirical studies on the application of QM standards in the communications industry is employed to test and quantify the model. The studies are coded according to the developed assessment criteria and evaluated to later employ them in a structural equation model. The result is a communications industry specific causal model providing an overview on the impact of diverse quality management strategies on elements of corporate success.

Context

The paper asks how quality in the communication business can be assessed and managed, and looks for the answer in empirical research on quality management. It appeared in English in the Zeitschrift für interdisziplinäre ökonomische Forschung (ZIFP) / Journal of Interdisciplinary Economic Research, issue 2, pages 4 to 22. In terms of content, it is the precursor of the literature part of the dissertation. The abstract above reproduces the author’s wording as it appears in the RePEc entry.

Companies communicate through more and more channels, and online in particular a large share of messages reaches people for whom they are not intended. To limit such wastage, small and large firms commission agencies. This raises the question of how a contractor recognizes a good agency. The quality of communication had hardly been examined systematically.

The established concepts of quality management come from goods production, with the automotive industry as a pioneer. Only later were they transferred to services. For communication services, the paper names three obstacles. A check at the end of value creation does not work for intangible services; quality management has to cover every stage. Communication services are tailored anew for each commission, their effect depends on situation and receiver, and customer expectations are hard to standardize. New electronic channels have, moreover, changed how products and companies are communicated, so that older standards no longer fit. According to the paper’s finding, there was no quality model that took these peculiarities into account.

Research questions

The paper aims to develop and test a comprehensive model for quality assessment and quality management in the communication business. With it, agencies could assure comparable standards, contractors would find a competent partner more quickly, and the market would become more transparent. Five key questions structure the work:

• What basic elements make up the concept of quality?
• Which quality aspects count in the communication business?
• How are these aspects related?
• What do contractors expect from high-quality communication, and what does it bring about?
• Which preconditions ensure that communication succeeds?

Behind the questions stands a simple causal model. Certain preconditions in the agency produce quality, and quality produces success. The starting point is Schramm’s communication model with sender, receiver, message and transference.

Approach

Categories from ISO 9001, TQM and EFQM

The first part clarifies the concept of quality. It leads from the Latin “qualis” via the four aspects in Aristotle to Garvin’s five perspectives, which conceive quality now as a measurable product characteristic, now as a judgment by the user. The paper then examines two families of models. It considers the ISO 9001 standard too closely tied to industrial production cycles, since know-how and creativity are missing there as input factors. The EFQM model, according to its account the best-known implementation of Total Quality Management, relies on creativity and innovation rather than on control and planning. It therefore fits better with an industry whose output consists of ideas.

From EFQM and ISO 9001 the paper derives seven assessment criteria. Four concern the preconditions of quality, in EFQM vocabulary the enablers:

• creative and innovative leadership,
• the design of strategies and processes,
• involvement and cooperation of employees,
• external resources and partners.

Three concern the results, namely the value for customers, the value for employees and sustainability in social, economic and ecological respects. Leadership deliberately stands on a level with the other enablers. The paper justifies this by saying that in development-driven industries such as the communication business, partnership and cooperation often count for more than hierarchy.

Meta-analysis following the QUOROM statement

The model is tested by means of a meta-analysis. It follows the QUOROM statement, a standard for traceable review papers with clear questions, justified criteria, a documented search and a measurable assessment. Three databases were searched, EBSCOhost Business Source Complete, Emerald Insight and Google Scholar, with the combination “Quality management”, “communications” and “empirical”. Only full texts from academic journals were considered. For each database, the ten most relevant hits were shortlisted. A manual follow-up selection retained only studies that work empirically, deal with quality management, relate to communication and examine enablers or results. In the end there were 30 studies.

Each study was coded on each of the seven assessment criteria on a five-point Likert scale, from 1 for “no importance” to 5 for “highest priority”. The paper checked whether 30 studies are sufficient by means of the standard error. It stood at 0.086; the threshold set, following an approximation by Kline, was 0.2. The coded values were later to enter a structural equation model. The paper itself names the weaknesses of the procedure. Primary studies pursue different objectives with different methods, contrary findings often remain unpublished, the quality of the analysis depends on the quality of the primary studies, and every evaluator reads with his or her prior experience.

Findings of the paper

On average across the 30 studies, employees as well as strategies and processes weigh most heavily among the enablers. Among the results, customer value comes first. The values spread most widely for social value and external partners, because studies either treat these topics at length or omit them entirely.

The qualitative evaluation traces several lines. Leadership and the success of TQM programmes are closely linked, and what counts above all is the communication between management and workforce. One of the studies traces the failure of such programmes back to breakdowns in communication between management and the lower levels. Creativity and innovation drive quality. How well employees work together depends on the quality of information flows. The involvement of suppliers and partners improves the results. Social engagement, by contrast, still plays a minor role in the companies examined.

In conclusion, the paper notes that communication plays a central role in quality management because it carries the exchange of knowledge inwards and outwards. Quality standards strengthen market success, and employee satisfaction and social value benefit as well. For the communication business, the paper calls for quantitative research of its own. This account follows the manuscript of the paper; the printed version may differ in wording.

Relation to the thesis

The literature part of the thesis builds on the paper. Both use the same definitions of quality, weigh ISO 9001, TQM and EFQM in the same way and justify the research gap with the same three obstacles. In five respects the thesis goes further.

The survey confirmed some of the lines from the literature. In the final model of the thesis, leadership efficiency is far ahead. Communicational strategy, whose predecessor “strategies and processes” was still among the most heavily weighted categories in the literature evaluation, remained in the model, but without significance. For external resources and partners, no significant effect could be demonstrated in the survey; they dropped out of the model. On the success side, customer value remained in the form of customer trust. The weights are given under Results.

The two data foundations measure different things. The coding records what weight empirical studies on quality management and corporate communication give to a topic. The survey measures how contractors assess their agency and what effect they attribute to a completed project. How the model is built and how it was tested is described on the pages QMC model, Method and Results.